Update Readme.md
This commit is contained in:
rodič
b95f4b5760
revize
e22aa74516
|
@ -195,14 +195,14 @@ _Product feature_
|
|||
|
||||
Answers:
|
||||
- rfc.vac.dev is a good start. The RFC repository contains the specification of Waku and other protocols. In terms of @ethstatus's privacy claims. It is good to first look at the base layer: @waku_org
|
||||
- The RFCs describe the protocol and also contains security assumptions/guarantees section."
|
||||
- The RFCs describe the protocol and also contain security assumptions/guarantees section."
|
||||
- The target audience are researchers and maintainers of Waku implementations. Not the easiest thing to read!
|
||||
|
||||
_Observations_:
|
||||
-
|
||||
|
||||
_Product feature_
|
||||
-
|
||||
-
|
||||
|
||||
**Rotki**
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -212,7 +212,7 @@ Answers:
|
|||
- Opensource, so your techy friend can see we are not lying. It really isn't complicated imo.
|
||||
- To be 100% sure read code
|
||||
- But it does not take an expert to understand that an application that you download, run locally and keeps all data locally is 1000x more private than a webapp
|
||||
- We have been brainwashed to calling webapps, as ""apps"" now.
|
||||
- We have been brainwashed to calling webapps, as "apps" now.
|
||||
|
||||
_Observations_:
|
||||
-
|
||||
|
@ -620,42 +620,47 @@ Answers:
|
|||
- You could check the generated configuration files. For example, make sure that proxy=127.0.0.1:9050 is in fact set in /var/lib/bitcoind/bitcoin.conf.
|
||||
|
||||
_Observations_:
|
||||
-
|
||||
- if a product requires tech proficiency - it's important to highlight it (entry-level into tech understanding)
|
||||
- Tor is a plus1 to privacy, but not a silver bullet (important to understand "privacy enhancement" & not just "1 solution to general privacy")
|
||||
- configuration files can't be checked by non-techies (but could be used as a signal on privacy transparency - if service hides clues on how to self-check it's privacy credibility or not)
|
||||
|
||||
_Product feature_
|
||||
-
|
||||
- "privacy stack" enhancement prototyping (1 solution + 1 solution = privacy "2x" (like Session messenger + dVPN)
|
||||
|
||||
**Litecash**
|
||||
|
||||
Answers:
|
||||
- Litecash is the first fork of BEAM and we tweaked the fees to zero, and less congested to keep lightning fast transaction along with a sustainable coin supply for mass adoption while keeping inflation resistance.
|
||||
- Litecash is the first fork of BEAM and we tweaked the fees to zero, and less congested to keep lightning-fast transaction along with a sustainable coin supply for mass adoption while keeping inflation resistance.
|
||||
- Our privacy is built on the mimblewimble protocol which is unique compared to other privacy protocols. Litecash transactions are not held on a ledger and disappear as opposed to other methods of scrambling or clustering which could actually be decoded with new wave super computers.
|
||||
- if a transfer does not complete due to a wrong address or defunct wallet, funds get sent back to the sender within 24 hours ensuring no lost coins.
|
||||
|
||||
_Observations_:
|
||||
-
|
||||
- a fork can be misleading to non-techies mistaking it for a core protocol or misunderstanding as an original product
|
||||
- third party tech is proven within another community, original protocol engineers &/or researchers which could obscure search on audits, privacy validity
|
||||
- DeFi features aren't equal privacy features
|
||||
|
||||
_Product feature_
|
||||
-
|
||||
- forkability x privacy 101
|
||||
- privacy tech vocabulary (mimblewimble, scrambling, clustering etc)
|
||||
|
||||
**Black Box**
|
||||
|
||||
Answers:
|
||||
- For the transactions anonymizer, privacy is preserved when the onchain link between SENDER and RECEIVER wallets is broken or untraceable.
|
||||
|
||||
_Observations_:
|
||||
-
|
||||
_Observations:_
|
||||
- general privacy storytelling missing proof on untraceability (linkage between sender & receiver)
|
||||
|
||||
_Product feature_
|
||||
-
|
||||
_Product feature:_
|
||||
- private transactions 101
|
||||
|
||||
**Ergo**
|
||||
|
||||
Answers:
|
||||
- Ergo has the flexibility to implement privacy in various use cases. Although it is not a privacy-oriented blockchain, Sigma Protocols allow privacy-oriented dApps like ErgoMixer, or private side-chains, to obfuscate specific transactions https://t.co/KVNIk8amD1
|
||||
|
||||
_Observations_:
|
||||
-
|
||||
_Observations:_
|
||||
- important to understand that protocols could be non-private, but activate private use-cases (partial implementation). Separate core tech from privacy narrative
|
||||
|
||||
_Product feature_
|
||||
-
|
||||
_Product feature:_
|
||||
- case-studies (privacy matching): protocol = transparent, but use-cases = private (like Ethereum)
|
||||
|
|
Načítá se…
Odkázat v novém úkolu